In their own words: language preferences of individuals who use heroin

Attitudes and Perspectives of Service Providers on Persons Who Use Stimulants in Northern and Central Mexico

BACKGROUND

Methamphetamine and other stimulant use are increasing across Mexico while treatment options and public funding remain scarce for substance use treatment. This study examined the attitudes and perspectives of service providers who work with persons who use stimulants in Mexico.

METHODS

Semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted with 20 service providers in diverse cities in the northern and central regions of Mexico, from healthcare centers and harm reduction community-based organizations (CBOs). All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and de-identified. We conducted a thematic analysis to identify and compare common themes and patterns among participants, including portrayal of persons who use stimulants, dynamics of use, attitudes toward persons who use stimulants, and treatment availability and effectiveness.

RESULTS

First, service providers considered that persons who use stimulants have more complex backgrounds than others who use other substances. Second, although most providers mentioned trauma, pain, and the risk environment, CBO providers also stressed the importance of accounting for hedonism for understanding stimulant use trajectories. Third, treatment options are based on the type of services the institutions provide, usually constrained to guidelines for any substance use. In a few cases, cocaine treatment guidelines are used regardless of the type of stimulant used. Fourth, although health care services are abstinence-based, providers acknowledge the effectiveness of harm reduction approaches. In contrast, CBOs provide person-centered options.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, although service providers are aware of the increase in stimulant use, stigmatizing attitudes are prominent among some of them. However, providers in CBOs were more sensitized to their communities' specific needs. Public policy recommendations include training to eliminate institutional stigmatization, the importance of first-person language, harm reduction effectiveness, and implementing community-based interventions to improve stimulant use-related services.

Occurrence of Stigmatizing Documentation Among Hospital Medicine Encounters With Opioid-Related Diagnosis Codes: Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Physician use of stigmatizing language in the clinical documentation of hospitalized adults with opioid use is common. However, patient factors associated with stigmatizing language in this setting remain poorly characterized.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine whether specific demographic factors and clinical outcomes are associated with the presence of stigmatizing language by physicians in the clinical documentation of encounters with opioid-related ICD-10 (International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision) codes.

METHODS

Hospital encounters with one or more associated opioid-related ICD-10 admission diagnoses on the hospital medicine service during the 2020 calendar year were analyzed for the presence of stigmatizing language in history and physical and discharge summaries. Multivariable adjusted logistic regression models were used to determine associations of age, race, gender, medication for addiction treatment use, against medical advice discharge, homelessness, comorbid polysubstance use, comorbid psychiatric disorder, comorbid chronic pain, cost, and 30-day readmission with the presence of stigmatizing language.

RESULTS

A total of 221 encounters were identified, of which 64 (29%) encounters had stigmatizing language present in physician documentation. Most stigmatizing language was due to use of "substance abuse" rather than the preferred term "substance use" (63/66 instances). Polysubstance use and homelessness were independently associated with the presence of stigmatizing language (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 7.83; 95% CI 3.42-19.24 and aOR 2.44; 95% CI 1.03-5.90) when controlling for chronic pain and other covariates.

CONCLUSIONS

Among hospital medicine encounters with an opioid-related diagnosis, stigmatizing language by physicians in clinical documentation was common and independently associated with comorbid polysubstance use and homelessness.

Perceptions of medications, program settings, and drug use histories among individuals engaged in treatment for opioid use disorder

Background: Nearly two million adults in the US currently live with an Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) diagnosis. Recent efforts have encouraged and facilitated widespread adoption of empirically supported medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), yet MOUD and OUD behavioral health interventions remain dramatically underutilized. Fear of discrimination and judgment, compounded by systemic and regulatory barriers, hinder individuals' access to specialty treatment.Objectives: The goal of the current study was to (1) reveal how perspectives toward OUD treatment may differ across medication types, program settings, and drug use history; (2) address systemic and regulatory components that potentially foster and propagate positive or negative attributions to OUD; and (3) understand how experiences reduce patients' willingness to pursue and/or maintain long term treatment.Methods: Twenty-four adults engaged in buprenorphine treatment at two outpatient addiction treatment centers participated in in-depth, qualitative interviews between 2019 and 2020 in Providence, Rhode Island.Results: Thematic analysis revealed negative attributions toward OUD across all participants. Three key themes developed from the coding and analysis: (1) differential perceptions of therapeutic medications (2) negative perceptions of treatment programs and (3) perceptions of drugs and people who use drugs.Conclusions: Stigmatizing language remains a major public health issue that needs to be addressed to facilitate treatment for individuals for OUD and other drug use disorders. Incorporating strategies targeting labeling across medication types, program settings, and drug use may improve treatment outcomes by reducing the inaccurate beliefs surrounding OUD and connecting patients to evidence-based support.

Stigmatization of people with addiction by health professionals: Current knowledge. A scoping review

Background

Stigma of people with substance and non-substance use disorders (SNSUD) is a long-known phenomenon. The aim of this review was to assess the stigmatization, by health professionals, of people with SNSUD, its characteristics and change over time.

Methods

A scoping review of literature reviews was conducted with systematic search of PubMed, Scopus and PsycINFO databases.

Results

From the 19 selected reviews, all focused on people with SUD (PWSUD) only and 20 % to 51 % of health professionals had negative attitudes/beliefs about SUD. Addiction training and clinical experience with PWSUD were associated with a less negative attitude. Health professionals' negative beliefs, lack of time or support were associated with less involvement in addiction care. Tobacco use disorder, SUDs other than alcohol and tobacco, relapse, psychiatric comorbidity or criminal records were associated with a more negative attitude. The influence of several variables potentially related to stigmatization was inconsistent across selected reviews. The evolution of stigmatization over time was not systematically assessed and showed mixed results.

Conclusions

The stigmatization of PWSUD has an impact on their care, and a change in some variables could reduce its importance: moral model of addiction, health professionals' negative beliefs, lack of training, time, and role support. Teaching what addiction is according to the medical chronic disease model, and developing stigma-focused training could improve caregivers' attitudes and further reduce stigma. Further studies are needed to determine whether stigma of PWSUD by health professionals has changed over time and to characterize stigma for people with non-substance use disorders.

Addressing stigma within the dissemination of research products to improve quality of care for pregnant and parenting people affected by substance use disorder

Substance use disorders are a common and treatable condition among pregnant and parenting people. Social, self, and structural stigma experienced by this group represent a barrier to harm reduction, treatment utilization, and quality of care. We examine features of research dissemination that may generate or uphold stigmatization at every level for pregnant and parenting individuals affected by substance use disorder and their children. We explore stigma reduction practices within the research community that can increase uptake of evidence-based treatment programs and prevent potential harm related to substance use in pregnant and parenting people. The strategies we propose include: (1) address researcher stereotypes, prejudice, and misconceptions about pregnant and parenting people with substance use disorder; (2) engage in interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary collaborations that engage with researchers who have lived experience in substance use; (3) use community-based approaches and engage community partners, (4) address stigmatizing language in science communication; (5) provide contextualizing information about the social and environmental factors that influence substance use among pregnant and parenting people; and (6) advocate for stigma-reducing policies in research articles and other scholarly products.

What's in a Name? Terminology Preferences Among Patients Receiving Methadone Treatment

BACKGROUND

Despite recognition of the importance of substance use disorder (SUD) terminology, few studies examine terminology preferences among patients with SUDs.

OBJECTIVE

To examine preferences of patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) concerning the terminology used by addiction counselors.

DESIGN

From January 1, 2019, to February 28, 2020, participants were recruited consecutively from 30-day treatment review sessions at outpatient methadone treatment programs in the Northeastern United States to complete a cross-sectional survey.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were English-speaking adult patients with OUD enrolled in methadone treatment.

MAIN MEASURES

Participants completed 7-point Likert-type scales from 1 ("Strongly Disagree") to 7 ("Strongly Agree") to rate their preferences for (a) the presenting problem, (b) collective nouns referring to those with the presenting problem, and (c) personal descriptors. We used univariate analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) to examine the associations between demographics (i.e., age, sex, and race) and terminology preferences and ordinal logit regression to explore the association between 12-step program partiality and preference for the term "addict."

KEY RESULTS

We surveyed 450 patients with mean age of 38.5 (SD = 11.1) years; 59.6% self-identified as male, 77.6% as White, and 12.7% as Hispanic. The highest-rated preferences for presenting problem were "addiction," "substance use," and "substance abuse." The highest-rated collective noun terms were "client," "patient," and "guest." "Person with an addiction," "person with substance use disorder," and "substance-dependent person" were the highest-rated personal descriptors. There were significant differences in terminological preference based on race and age. Twelve-step program partiality was associated with greater preference for the term "addict" (F = 21.22, p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Terminology preferences among people receiving methadone treatment aligned with existing guidelines recommending that clinicians use medically accurate and destigmatizing terminology when referring to substance use disorders and the persons who have them. Demographic differences emerged in terminological preferences, warranting further examination.

Management of opioid use disorder and associated conditions among hospitalized adults: A Consensus Statement from the Society of Hospital Medicine

Hospital-based clinicians frequently care for patients with opioid withdrawal or opioid use disorder (OUD) and are well-positioned to identify and initiate treatment for these patients. With rising numbers of hospitalizations related to opioid use and opioid-related overdose, the Society of Hospital Medicine convened a working group to develop a Consensus Statement on the management of OUD and associated conditions among hospitalized adults. The guidance statement is intended for clinicians practicing medicine in the inpatient setting (e.g., hospitalists, primary care physicians, family physicians, advanced practice nurses, and physician assistants) and is intended to apply to hospitalized adults at risk for, or diagnosed with, OUD. To develop the Consensus Statement, the working group conducted a systematic review of relevant guidelines and composed a draft statement based on extracted recommendations. Next, the working group obtained feedback on the draft statement from external experts in addiction medicine, SHM members, professional societies, harm reduction organizations and advocacy groups, and peer reviewers. The iterative development process resulted in a final Consensus Statement consisting of 18 recommendations covering the following topics: (1) identification and treatment of OUD and opioid withdrawal, (2) perioperative and acute pain management in patients with OUD, and (3) methods to optimize care transitions at hospital discharge for patients with OUD. Most recommendations in the Consensus Statement were derived from guidelines based on observational studies and expert consensus. Due to the lack of rigorous evidence supporting key aspects of OUD-related care, the working group identified important issues necessitating future research and exploration.

How to Reduce Stigma and Bias in Clinical Communication: a Narrative Review

A growing body of literature demonstrates that healthcare providers use stigmatizing language when speaking and writing about patients. In April 2021, the 21st Century Cures Act compelled clinicians to make medical records open to patients. We believe that this is a unique moment to provide clinicians with guidance on how to avoid stigma and bias in our language as part of larger efforts to promote health equity. We performed an exhaustive scoping review of the gray and academic literature on stigmatizing medical language. We used thematic analysis and concept mapping to organize the findings into core principles for use in clinical practice. We compiled a list of terms to avoid and seven strategies to promote non-judgmental health record keeping: (1) use person-first language, (2) eliminate pejorative terms, (3) make communication inclusive, (4) avoid labels, (5) stop weaponizing quotes, (6) avoid blaming patients, and (7) abandon the practice of leading with social identifiers. While we offer guidance clinicians can use to promote equity through language on an individual level, health inequities are structural and demand simultaneous systems and policy change. By improving our language, we can disrupt the harmful narratives that allow health disparities to persist.

Experiences of stigma in hospitals with addiction consultation services: A qualitative analysis of patients' and hospital-based providers' perspectives

BACKGROUND

Addiction consultation services (ACS) provide evidence-based treatment to hospitalized patients with substance use disorders (SUD). Expansion of hospital-based addiction care may help to counteract the stigma that patients with SUD experience within the health care system. Stigma is among the most impactful barriers to seeking care and adhering to medical advice among people with SUD. We aimed to understand how the presence of an ACS affected patients' and hospital-based providers' experiences with stigma in the hospital setting.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative study utilizing focus groups and key informant interviews with hospital-based providers (hospitalists and hospital-based nurses, social workers, pharmacists). We also conducted key informant interviews with patients who received care from an ACS during their hospitalization. An interprofessional team coded and analyzed transcripts using a thematic analysis approach to identify emergent themes.

RESULTS

Sixty-two hospital-based providers participated in six focus groups or eight interviews. Twenty patients participated in interviews. Four themes emerged relating to the experiences of stigma reported by hospital-based providers and hospitalized patients with SUD: (1) past experiences in the health care system propagate a cycle of stigmatization between hospital-based providers and patients; (2) documentation in medical charts unintentionally or intentionally perpetuates enacted stigma among hospital-based providers resulting in anticipated stigma among patients; (3) the presence of an ACS reduces enacted stigma among hospital-based providers through expanding the use of evidenced-based SUD treatment and reframing the SUD narrative; (4) ACS team members combat the effects of internalized stigma by promoting feelings of self-worth, self-efficacy, and mutual respect among patients with SUD.

CONCLUSIONS

An ACS can facilitate destigmatization of hospitalized patients with SUD by incorporating evidence-based SUD treatment into routine hospital care, by providing and modeling compassionate care, and by reframing addiction as a chronic condition to be treated alongside other medical conditions. Future reductions of stigma in hospital settings may result from promoting greater use of evidence-based treatment for SUD and expanded education for health care providers on the use of non-stigmatizing language and medical terminology when documenting SUD in the medical chart.

Addressing Bias and Stigma in the Language We Use With Persons With Opioid Use Disorder: A Narrative Review

BACKGROUND: Despite an increase in access to medications for opioid use disorder, less than 20% of individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) receive treatment. Stigmatizing language has been identified as a potential trigger for explicit and implicit biases that may adversely affect treatment enrollment and quality of care for persons with OUD. AIMS: To conduct a narrative review of the literature on stigmatizing language and OUD, examine how treatment outcomes are affected, and present strategies to reduce bias and promote OUD treatment. METHOD: A narrative review of the literature between 2010 and 2019 was conducted using CINAHL, PubMed, and PsycINFO. Key search terms were opioid use disorder (or substance use disorder), stigma, and language. Fifty-two articles were screened for inclusion, and 17 articles were included in this review. RESULTS: The articles reviewed provide consensus that stigmatizing language toward persons with OUD fosters explicit and implicit bias and impedes engagement in treatment. Four themes emerged: (1) stigma and language, (2) stigma and language used by health care professionals, (3) stigma and language used by the general public, and (4) stigma and language used by people with OUD. CONCLUSIONS: Stigmatizing language is dehumanizing and plays a pivotal role in bias and discrimination that may contribute to unsatisfactory treatment outcomes among persons with OUD. Health care professionals, nursing in particular, must assume an intentional stance against stigma perpetuated toward persons with OUD through advocacy in education, practice, policy, and the media.

The use of person-centered language in scientific research articles focusing on opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) affects approximately 1% of the population. Despite the prevalence of OUD, it remains a highly stigmatized disorder. Using person-centered language (PCL) - and thereby emphasizing the significance of the person rather than their diagnosis - is a potential strategy to reduce stigma in medical research related to addiction. Thus, we aimed to determine adherence to PCL in OUD-related publications according to the American Medical Association's guidelines.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search for articles published between January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2020 using the PubMed database. Articles were randomized and screened until we reached 300 articles that met inclusion criteria. Three-hundred articles were screened to meet this goal. Articles were then screened for non-PCL terms, determined a priori.

RESULTS

The majority (240/300; 80 %) of OUD-related publications were not adherent to the AMA guidelines on PCL. Additionally, the use of emotional language (i.e. suffer, afflicted, etc.) was employed in 48 % (145/300) of articles. Stigmatizing terminology was found in 73 % (218/300) of the OUD related articles in this study. Our study demonstrated a statistically significant correlation between senior author affiliation and adherence to reporting guidelines (i.e., PRISMA, STROBE, etc.).

CONCLUSION

A majority of OUD-related publications are not adherent to AMA guidelines on PCL. Language used in these publications is often repeated and replicated in medical education and clinical practice, which directly impacts patient-provider relationships. PCL-adherent language is a tool that both medical researchers and clinicians can use to combat stigma that individuals with OUD may experience.

Heterogeneity in Jail Nursing Medical Intake Forms: A Content Analysis

Despite high prevalence of infectious diseases and substance use disorders in jails, there are limited guidelines for the nursing intake process in this setting. We performed a content analysis of nursing intake forms used at each of the 14 Massachusetts county jails, focusing on infectious disease and substance use disorder. Only 85% of jails offered HIV testing during nursing intake and 50% of jails offered hepatitis C testing. Preventive interventions such as vaccines or pre-exposure prophylaxis therapy were infrequently offered during nursing intake. Screening for substance use disorder was present on the majority of intake forms, but only 23% of intake forms inquired about ongoing medication-assisted treatment for opioid use disorder. The results reflect heterogeneity in nursing intake forms, highlighting missed opportunities for public health interventions.

Memory for syntactic differences in mental illness descriptions

The American Psychiatric Association recommends that practitioners discuss mental illnesses using person-first, or comparatively state-based language, rather than trait-based language. The aim of this initiative is to both avoid treating the symptoms of an illness as a defining characteristic of the people who experience these symptoms and to reduce the stigmatization of mental illness. However, some of the implications of these initiatives have not been tested. Here, we investigate one of these implications-people's memory for changes in syntactic constructions in descriptions of mental illness. In three experiments, we observed that people form similar representations of state- and trait-based passages as reflected by their performance in two recognition tasks and a free-recall task. However, a fourth experiment suggested that participants' memories of the exact syntax they read are not so degraded that they are unable to recover what they read when explicitly prompted. Altogether, these results suggest that some aspects of the person-first language initiative are likely to be transient.

The use of person-first language in scientific literature focused on drug-seeking behavior: a cross-sectional analysis

CONTEXT

Person first language (PFL) - a way of referring to individuals with medical conditions or disability that emphasizes the person over their condition or disability - is important in reducing the stigma surrounding individuals who exhibit drug-seeking behavior. Drug-seeking behavior is generally associated with a negative connotation by healthcare professionals, which may create poor provider perceptions of these individuals and potentially impact patient care. Therefore, to reduce stigmatization surrounding drug-seeking behavior and to improve patient care in these individuals, the use of PFL should be promoted.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this study is to investigate how frequently research articles focused on drug-seeking behavior adhere to PFL.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional analysis systematically searching PubMed for articles published between May 1, 2011, and April 30, 2020, focused on drug-seeking behavior. To be included, the article must have met the following criteria: (1) published in a peer-reviewed journal; (2) relevant to drug-seeking behavior; and (3) must include human subjects and be retrievable in English. All articles were screened and data were extracted independently in a masked, duplicate fashion. Each article was reviewed for 19 predefined non-PFL terms with certain terms adopted from the American Medical Association Manual of Style.

RESULTS

Our search returned 699 articles related to drug-seeking behavior, of which 390 articles met inclusion criteria and were analyzed for non-PFL. Our analysis found only 13.6% (53/390) of articles adhered to PFL while 86.4% (337/390) of articles contained at least some form of non-PFL. There was no association between PFL adherence and extracted study characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

PFL adherence is uncommon among research literature focused on drug-seeking behavior. The power of language can be profound, and should be understood by researchers, health care providers, and educators alike, specifically when dealing with known and exhibited characteristics of substance use disorders. This is relevant because of the high prevalence of substance use disorders, limited amount of prior research, and the impact stigma has on patients and healthcare providers.

Vereinheitlichung der Bezeichnungen für Verhaltenssüchte

Zusammenfassung. Fragestellung: Es existiert eine Vielzahl von Begriffen für Verhaltenssüchte, die Mängel in Operationalisierung, Bezug zum Verhalten, Kompatibilität mit internationalen Klassifikationen sowie nicht stigmatisierender Nutzung aufweisen. Daher werden einheitliche Begriffe für Verhaltenssüchte benötigt. Methode: Im Rahmen einer Leitlinie zur Diagnostik und Behandlung Internetbezogener Störungen wurden Lösungen in Form eines Expertenkonsens entwickelt. Ergebnisse: Als Grundlage wurde die Einteilung von Verhaltenssüchten in der 11. Revision der International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) genutzt. Es wurden die Begriffe Computerspielstörung (CSS) und Glücksspielstörung (GSS) für die beiden in ICD-11 enthaltenen Verhaltenssüchte gewählt sowie drei weitere spezifizierte Verhaltenssüchte vorgeschlagen: Soziale-Netzwerke-Nutzungsstörung (SNS), Shoppingstörung (ShS) und Pornografie-Nutzungsstörung (PNS). Für CSS, GSS und ShS wird weiterhin zwischen vorwiegend online oder vorwiegend offline unterschieden. Als Oberbegriff wird Störungen aufgrund von Verhaltenssüchten vorgeschlagen. Für Störungen aufgrund von Verhaltenssüchten, die sich vorwiegend auf online ausgeübte Verhaltensweisen beziehen, kann alternativ der Oberbegriff Internetnutzungsstörungen verwendet werden. Schlussfolgerung: Die vorgeschlagenen Termini weisen Verbesserungen im Vergleich zu uneindeutigen oder aus anderen Gründen ungünstigen Begriffen dar. Gleichzeitig konnte eine Kompatibilität mit der ICD-11 ermöglicht werden.

Shifting the Paradigm for Opioid Use Disorder: Changing the Language

Morbidity and mortality associated from opioid use have been on the rise, exemplifying a major public health epidemic. Despite public health interventions, opioid-related morbidity and mortality have yet to plateau or decrease. One explanation for this phenomenon is the presence of barriers to evidence-based pharmacotherapies. Stigma has only recently been identified as a barrier to treatment. The purpose of this report is to evaluate language utilized to describe opioid use disorder and associated pharmacological treatment. Nurse practitioners must emerge as leaders in assuring that patient-centered and non-stigmatizing language is utilized, in order to improve patient outcomes.

The associated press stylebook changes and the use of addiction-related stigmatizing terms in news media

Background: The May 2017 publication of the updated Associated Press (AP) Stylebook offered guidance that advised against stigmatizing. The objective of this study was to assess the frequency of stigmatizing terms describing substance use and disorder in news articles before and after the update of the AP Stylebook. Methods: We reviewed articles containing terms "opioid" or "addiction" from three major news outlets. We counted the number of AP Stylebook proscribed terms found in each article and compared the proportions of articles from each outlet with proscribed terms before and after AP Stylebook publication. Results: In 2016, 56-94% of articles from each of the three news outlets contained a proscribed term. The use of proscribed terms in articles identified by searching "opioid" published in the New York Times decreased (72% vs. 94%, p = 0.01) after the AP Stylebook change. For other news outlets, there were no significant differences, though all proportions were lower after publication. Conclusions: Evidence for a decrease in the use of stigmatizing terminology for substance use and disorders in news articles after publication of guidance was limited. Additional efforts should address use of such terminology to maximize implementation of effective addiction health policies and practices.